Planning for School Improvement

Aubrey Rogers High School

School Year
 Back to School List

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
Proficiency in 9th grade ELA remained relatively stable, with only a slight 1% overall decline. ESE students showed significant improvement, increasing their proficiency from 35% to approximately 50%, marking a roughly 15% gain. The performance of our advanced group stayed consistent, while there was a 4% decrease in proficiency among our L25L students. In 10th grade, overall student proficiency increased by about 6%. Both ESE and ELL student proficiency remained unchanged, but there was a notable 10% increase in proficiency for our L25L students.
In math, we saw an overall increase of about 6% in student proficiency on the Algebra 1 EOC. ESE proficiency decreased by 6%, while ELL proficiency increased by 8%. Additionally, the proficiency of our lowest 25% dropped by 9%.
Our Biology proficiency increased from 78% to 86%, marking an overall gain of 8%. ESE students showed significant growth, with proficiency rising from 31% to 58%, an increase of approximately 27%. ELL proficiency also grew from 48% to 54%, an overall gain of 6%.
In U.S. History, we saw a 1% increase in overall proficiency, a 19% gain in ELL performance, and a 3% increase among ESE students compared to last year.
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
ESE proficiency showed significant growth in both Geometry and Biology. Geometry saw an overall 13% increase, while Biology demonstrated a notable 27% gain in student achievement. ELL students experienced a 19% increase in US History proficiency compared to previous years. This growth can be attributed to a stronger focus on content-specific supports for ELL students. Our ELL instructor has been an outstanding resource, providing targeted push-in support across various core subjects. Her individualized approach has made a meaningful impact on student outcomes across multiple content areas. This year, we plan to integrate her more regularly into our Wednesday workshops and core content support sessions to maintain and expand these gains. For ESE, we were intentional in our co-teacher pairings and prioritized stability in co-teaching schedules. Additionally, we strategically assigned two instructors to co-teach based on specific student needs, enhancing instructional support and consistency in the classroom.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
Algebra performance was lower than the district average and showed a decline compared to our own data from last year. Overall, math had the lowest performance across all subjects, with Algebra 1 Regular showing only a 13% gain, indicating limited growth. When reviewing math scores from the previous year, the data reflects a continued decline in overall math proficiency. Geometry proficiency was also notably low, with a 5% decrease compared to last year; however, it remained 7% above the overall district average. One contributing factor to the decline in Algebra performance was the instability in staffing, as one block experienced four different teachers throughout the school year. In response to performance trends in Geometry, we have strategically reassigned instructors based on their prior results and favorable trends. Additionally, all Geometry courses have been leveled by scaled score to support more targeted instruction.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
Algebra performance was lower than the district average and showed a decline compared to our own data from last year. Overall, math had the lowest performance across all subjects, with Algebra 1 Regular showing only a 13% gain, indicating limited growth. When reviewing math scores from the previous year, the data reflects a continued decline in overall math proficiency. Geometry proficiency was also notably low, with a 5% decrease compared to last year; however, it remained 7% above the overall district average. One contributing factor to the decline in Algebra performance was the instability in staffing, as one block experienced four different teachers throughout the school year. In response to performance trends in Geometry, we have strategically reassigned instructors based on their prior results and favorable trends. Additionally, all Geometry courses have been leveled by scaled score to support more targeted instruction.
Which data component had the greatest gap when compared to the state average? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this gap and any trends. State data can be found here.
The most significant area of concern in our data review was Algebra 1 proficiency. Specifically, our on-level Algebra 1 course (singleton block) showed minimal growth, with only 13.8% of students demonstrating proficiency gains. Upon reviewing individualized teacher data, contributing factors included a lack of instructional rigor, excessive flexibility in assignment completion, and assessments that had limited impact on students’ overall grades. In response, we have restructured course scheduling based on performance trends and reassigned the instructor to a content area more aligned with their strengths to ensure better instructional alignment and student outcomes.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
Highest Priorities: 1.) Student Gains in Math: Focus on improving overall student gains in Algebra 1 and Geometry through targeted instruction, progress monitoring and strategic scheduling. 2.) Math Proficiency/Subgroups: Address general proficiency and declines in subgroups (ESE students saw a 6% decrease in Algebra, and ELL had a 13% decrease in Geometry). 3.) ELA Student Gains: Strengthen supports through scheduling and formative practices, especially in grades 9 and 10, with an emphasis on foundational reading and writing skills. 4.) ELA Proficiency – Lowest 25% (L25L): Reduce proficiency gaps among L25 through structured literacy interventions and differentiated instruction (scheduling). 5.) Sustaining Academic Rigor & School Culture: Maintain strong performance in Biology and U.S. History by continuing to support instructional rigor, while enhancing school culture to drive engagement and achievement across all contents.

SIP - Areas of Focus

The Aubrey Rogers High School vision is to provide a safe and positive learning environment where students can excel to their highest potential. Our goal is to prepare students to become lifelong learners and contributing members of a global society.
Our mission is to provide a high-quality learning environment that is rich in technology, innovation, collaboration, and real-world experiences. Through these unique learning opportunities, our students will be exposed to 21st century learning skills that will prepare them for the future.
Adjustments for SY26: The percentage of student proficiency in ELA and across all subgroups will increase by 5% by May 2026, as measured by the FAST PM3. Specifically, proficiency will increase as follows: 9th/10th Grade: from 73% to 78% and from 74% to 79% ESE 9th: from 50% to 55% ESE 10th: from 33% to 38% ELL 9th: from 12% to 17% ELL 10th: from 30% to 35%
(View Marzano Model)
The evidence-based strategy that Aubrey Rogers High School will utilize from the Marzano Focused Teacher Evaluation Model (FTEM) is “Using questions to help students elaborate on content.” Our goal is to support both general proficiency and student gains by employing a more individualized formative approach through questioning strategies. By encouraging the use of progressively more complex questions, we aim to foster critical thinking and better assess student understanding, ahead of state assessment monitoring tools or district benchmarks.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning: Provide in-depth training to all teachers on how to use effective questioning techniques to track student progress. Particular emphasis will be placed on using student responses to identify areas needing intervention, with a focus on improving instructional implementation, interpreting student understanding through dialogue, and developing targeted strategies for supporting student subgroups.
Person Responsible:
Jessie Garcia & Doug Grimm
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Data sheets and data chats between teachers and administrators, discussions during PLCs (modeling assessment discussions as an instructional practice to identify common areas of learning deficits on specific standards as a team), use of plc form, and bi-weekly monitoring of student academic performance.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Data: Teachers will conduct instructional data chats with content area administrators.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team/Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will be provided further data analysis professional development and a reflection accountability assessment form to further deepen their understanding of individualized student performance in their classrooms through the use of instructional inquiry.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: Teachers will participate in Department PLCs to discuss data and best practices on a bi-weekly basis.
Person Responsible:
Administrative team/ support from department chairs
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
We will continue to utilize PLCs to review student data, identify key challenges, develop collaborative solutions, and create actionable next steps. Additional training will be provided on effective questioning strategies—focusing on how to use questions to deepen student understanding, prompt content elaboration, and conduct quick checks for comprehension.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Instructional Implementation:Teachers will implement planned strategies and lessons to support questioning techniques in their classrooms and assess students' progress in the learning process.
Person Responsible:
Jessie Garcia & Doug Grimm
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
The implementation of planned strategies will be monitored through classroom observations, gradebook entries, and student performance data.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
The percentage of students making gains in Math, across all subgroups, will increase by 5% by May 2026, as measured by the Algebra and Geometry EOC. Specifically, proficiency will increase in Algebra/Geometry from 45% to 50% and from 69% to 74%, respectively; in ESE, from 29% to 34% in Algebra; and in ELL, from 38% to 43% in Geometry.
(View Marzano Model)
The evidence-based strategy that Aubrey Rogers High School will utilize from the Marzano Focused Teacher Evaluation Model (FTEM) is “Using questions to help students elaborate on content.” Our goal is to support both general proficiency and student gains by employing a more individualized formative approach through questioning strategies. By encouraging the use of progressively more complex questions, we aim to foster critical thinking and better assess student understanding, ahead of state assessment monitoring tools or district benchmarks.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning: Provide in-depth training to all teachers on how to use effective questioning techniques to track student progress. Particular emphasis will be placed on using student responses to identify areas needing intervention, with a focus on improving instructional implementation, interpreting student understanding through dialogue, and developing targeted strategies for supporting student subgroups.
Person Responsible:
Jessie Garcia & Doug Grimm
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Data sheets and data chats between teachers and administrators, discussions during PLCs (modeling assessment discussions as an instructional practice to identify common areas of learning deficits on specific standards as a team), use of plc form, and bi-weekly monitoring of student academic performance.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Data: Teachers will conduct instructional data chats with content area administrators.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will be provided further data analysis professional development and a reflection accountability assessment form to further deepen their understanding of individualized student performance in their classrooms through the use of instructional inquiry.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: Teachers will participate in Department PLCs to discuss data and best practices on a bi-weekly basis.
Person Responsible:
Administrative team/ support from department chairs
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
PLC Reflection Form, Department Chair Leadership Discussions, Individualized Data Chats
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Instructional Implementation: Teachers will implement planned strategies and lessons to support questioning techniques in their classrooms and assess students' progress in the learning process.
Person Responsible:
Jessie and Doug Grimm
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
The implementation of planned strategies will be monitored through classroom observations, gradebook entries, and student performance data.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
By the end of FY26, the percentage of students meeting proficiency, as demonstrated by a level 3 or above in all subgroups, will increase by 5%, as shown on the US History end-of-course assessments. Specifically, proficiency in US History will increase from 79% to 84%.
(View Marzano Model)
The evidence-based strategy that Aubrey Rogers High School will utilize from the Marzano Focused Teacher Evaluation Model (FTEM) is “Using questions to help students elaborate on content.” Our goal is to support both general proficiency and student gains by employing a more individualized formative approach through questioning strategies. By encouraging the use of progressively more complex questions, we aim to foster critical thinking and better assess student understanding, ahead of state assessment monitoring tools or district benchmarks.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning: Provide in-depth training to all teachers on how to use effective questioning techniques to track student progress. Particular emphasis will be placed on using student responses to identify areas needing intervention, with a focus on improving instructional implementation, interpreting student understanding through dialogue, and developing targeted strategies for supporting student subgroups.
Person Responsible:
Jessie Garcia & Doug Grimm
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Data sheets and data chats between teachers and administrators, discussions during PLCs (modeling assessment discussions as an instructional practice to identify common areas of learning deficits on specific standards as a team), use of plc form, and bi-weekly monitoring of student academic performance.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Data: Teachers will conduct data chats with admin on a quarterly basis.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team/Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Data sheets and conversations. Teachers will meet with content area administrators on a quarterly basis to review student performance. Specific emphasis will be placed on understanding gains, student subgroups, and general academic growth.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: Teachers will participate in Department PLCs to discuss data and best practices on a bi-weekly basis.
Person Responsible:
Administrative team/ support from department chairs
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
PLC Reflection Form, Department Chair Leadership Discussions, Individualized Data Chats PLC Reflection Form, Department Chair Leadership Discussions, Individualized Data Chats
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Instructional Implementation: Teachers will implement planned strategies and lessons to support questioning techniques in their classrooms and assess students' progress in the learning process.
Person Responsible:
Beth Tenbarge
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
The implementation of planned strategies will be monitored through classroom observations, gradebook entries, and student performance data.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
By the end of FY26, the percentage of students meeting proficiency, as demonstrated by a level 3 or above in all subgroups, will increase by 5%, as shown on the Biology end-of-course assessments. Specifically, proficiency in Biology will increase from 86% to 91%.
(View Marzano Model)
The evidence-based strategy that Aubrey Rogers High School will utilize from the Marzano Focused Teacher Evaluation Model (FTEM) is “Using questions to help students elaborate on content.” Our goal is to support both general proficiency and student gains by employing a more individualized formative approach through questioning strategies. By encouraging the use of progressively more complex questions, we aim to foster critical thinking and better assess student understanding, ahead of state assessment monitoring tools or district benchmarks.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: Teachers will participate in Department PLCs to discuss data and best practices on a bi-weekly basis.
Person Responsible:
Administrative team/ support from department chairs
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
PLC Reflection Form, Department Chair Leadership Discussions, Individualized Data Chats PLC Reflection Form, Department Chair Leadership Discussions, Individualized Data Chats
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Data: Teachers will conduct data chats with admin on a quarterly basis.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team/Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Data sheets and conversations. Teachers will meet with content area administrators on a quarterly basis to review student performance. Specific emphasis will be placed on understanding gains, student subgroups, and general academic growth.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning: Provide in-depth training to all teachers on how to use effective questioning techniques to track student progress. Particular emphasis will be placed on using student responses to identify areas needing intervention, with a focus on improving instructional implementation, interpreting student understanding through dialogue, and developing targeted strategies for supporting student subgroups.
Person Responsible:
Jessie Garcia & Doug Grimm
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Data sheets and data chats between teachers and administrators, discussions during PLCs (modeling assessment discussions as an instructional practice to identify common areas of learning deficits on specific standards as a team), use of plc form, and bi-weekly monitoring of student academic performance.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Instructional Implementation: Teachers will implement planned strategies and lessons to support questioning techniques in their classrooms and assess students' progress in the learning process.
Person Responsible:
Timmy Kutz
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
The implementation of planned strategies will be monitored through classroom observations, gradebook entries, and student performance data.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
No response.
(View Marzano Model)
No response.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
By the end of FY26, 85% of students and staff will participate in at least one extracurricular activity or event, as measured by quarterly attendance records.
(View Marzano Model)
Promoting Teacher Leadership/Collaboration and Establishing and Maintaining Effective Relationships in a Student-Centered School. Our goal is to create a sense of community within our school where students feel regarded in their collaborative efforts and reinforced in their academic and social growth. Instructional presence at extracurricular events encourages students and allows our staff to form relationships that seep into classroom instructional practice and collaboration during professional learning communities.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Encourage teachers to attend extracurricular events, such as sporting events, concerts, and academic competitions. Reinforcement and reminders of events in newsletter, faculty meetings and weekly emails.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Attendance during extracurricular activities through pictures and a bulletin board. Incentives will be given quarterly to staff that attend events.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Encourage students to attend via "patriot pass," recurrent reminders and incentives during class meetings and school communication.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Attendance during extracurricular activities
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Use social media to promote positive culture at events.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Views of Social Media
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

Schoolwide Program Plan (SWP) Requirements

This section must be completed if the school is implementing a Title I, Part A SWP and opts to use the SIP to satisfy the requirements of the SWP plan, as outlined in the ESSA, Public Law No. 114-95, § 1114(b). This section is not required for non-Title I schools.

Budget Document Uploads

No files uploaded
1.

Provide the methods for dissemination of this SIP, UniSIG budget and SWP to stakeholders (e.g., students, families, school staff and leadership and local businesses and organizations). Please articulate a plan or protocol for how this SIP and progress will be shared and disseminated and to the extent practicable, provided in a language a parent can understand. (ESSA 1114(b)(4))

List the school's webpage* where the SIP is made publicly available.
* A webpage is not sufficient as the sole method of dissemination.
No response.
2.

Describe how the school plans to build positive relationships with parents, families and other community stakeholders to fulfill the school’s mission, support the needs of students and keep parents informed of their child’s progress.

List the school's webpage* where the school's Family Engagement Plan is made publicly available. (ESSA 1116(b-g))
* A webpage is not sufficient as the sole method of dissemination.
No response.
3.

Describe how the school plans to strengthen the academic program in the school, increase the amount and quality of learning time and help provide an enriched and accelerated curriculum. Include the Area of Focus if addressed in Part II of the SIP. (ESSA 1114(b)(7)ii))
No response.
4.

If appropriate and applicable, describe how this plan is developed in coordination and integration with other Federal, State, and local services, resources and programs, such as programs supported under ESSA, violence prevention programs, nutrition programs, housing programs, Head Start programs, adult education programs, career and technical education programs, and schools implementing CSI or TSI activities under section 1111(d). (ESSA 1114(b)(5))
No response.

CSI, TSI and ATSI Resource Review

Describe the process to review school improvement funding allocations and ensure resources are allocated based on needs. This section must be completed if the school is identified as ATSI, TSI or CSI in addition to completing an Area(s) of Focus identifying interventions and activities within the SIP (ESSA 1111(d)(1)(B)(4) and (d)(2)(C).

No response.

Reading Achievement Initiative for Scholastic Excellence (RAISE)

For the 2025-2026 school year, the criteria includes schools with students in grades three through five where 50 percent or more of its students, in any grade level, score below a level 3 on the most recent statewide English Language Arts (ELA) assessment; or progress monitoring data collected from the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system pursuant to s. 1008.25(9), F.S., shows that 50 percent or more of the students are not on track to pass the statewide, standardized grade 3 ELA assessment for any grade level kindergarten through grade 3; and at least 10 students must be present for both the second and third full-time equivalent (FTE) survey periods and must be enrolled at the time of the statewide, standardized testing.

Include a description of your Area of Focus (Instructional Practice specifically relating to Reading/ELA) for each grade below, how it affects student learning in literacy, and a rationale that explains how it was identified as a critical need from the data reviewed. Data that should be used to determine the critical need should include, at a minimum:

  • The percentage of students below Level 3 on the 2024−2025 statewide, standardized ELA assessment. Identification criteria must include each grade that has 50 percent or more students scoring below Level 3 in grades 3-5 on the statewide, standardized ELA assessment.
  • The percentage of students in kindergarten through grade 3, based on 2024−2025 coordinated screening and progress monitoring system data, who are not on track to score Level 3 or above on the statewide, standardized ELA assessment.
  • Other forms of data that should be considered: formative, progress monitoring and diagnostic assessment data.
1.

Grades K-2: Instructional Practice specifically relating to Reading/ELA

No reponse.
2.

Grades 3-5: Instructional Practice specifically related to Reading/ELA

No reponse.

School Advisory Council (SAC)

NameGroupEthnicityMigrant StatusDistrict EmployeeRoleStart of TermEnd of Term
No Council member found!
GroupNumber%
Community/Business00.0
Non-instructional Staff00.0
Parent00.0
Principal00.0
Students (required for HS; optional for MS)00.0
Teachers00.0
The number of non-employees must be at least 51% of the total SAC membership.
NOTE: The Principal is included in the district employee count.
GroupNumberPercent
District Employee 00.0
Non-District Employee 00.0
SAC membership must be representative (within 15%) of the ethnic, racial and socio-economic community served by the school. NOTE: The principal is NOT included in the demographic composition breakdown.
EthnicityNumber% SAC% Students
 00.00.0
Black00.04.0
Hispanic00.024.0
Others00.06.9
White00.065.0
Date

Existing Uploads

No Bylaws files have been uploaded yet.